Printed Circuit Board Assembly & PCB Design SMT Electronics Assembly Manufacturing Forum

Printed Circuit Board Assembly & PCB Design Forum

SMT electronics assembly manufacturing forum.


QP2 vs GSM

Jerry

#15769

QP2 vs GSM | 22 May, 1998

We are currently comparing the Fuji QP2 machine to the Universal GSM. The primary use will be for QFP's down to .4 mm pitch and for 300+I/O BGAs. My initial input has been that you spend alot of time tweeking PD's on the QP because the vision system is so fussy. I guess we have all been there and done that on IP machines. We are also quite afraid of the new FUJICAM software based on our past experience with MCS and F4G. It seems like Fuji never gets the bugs out of their software they just move to a brand new version...are they owned by Bill Gates? What have you guys experienced? Any other nonobvious things to look for? By the way these are the only two machines we are or will consider so no sales job required on other machines.

reply »

Ian Bates

#15777

Re: QP2 vs GSM | 28 May, 1998

| We are currently comparing the Fuji QP2 machine to the Universal GSM. The primary use will be for QFP's down to .4 mm pitch and for 300+I/O BGAs. My initial input has been that you spend alot of time tweeking PD's on the QP because the vision system is so fussy. I guess we have all been there and done that on IP machines. We are also quite afraid of the new FUJICAM software based on our past experience with MCS and F4G. It seems like Fuji never gets the bugs out of their software they just move to a brand new version...are they owned by Bill Gates? | What have you guys experienced? Any other nonobvious things to look for? By the way these are the only two machines we are or will consider so no sales job required on other machines.

reply »

Ian Bates

#15776

Re: QP2 vs GSM | 28 May, 1998

Jerry, I have been using the QP in a Proto and Production environment for about a Year and once the PD is Created(which may take some time) and vision processes. I rarely ever need to make further changes. As far as BGA Pd's. They are a Little tricky. But the Same holds true. With BGA's. Problems I see in Production are, generally handling or Process issues(ie: no nitro or fail to return to nitro). In the Arena of Software you could say the same about every Machine vendor. I will not eloborate on Past Software. Fujicam, I'm not sure of your programming experience. This Product so far, is light years ahead of any other CIM product(Cim Bridge, Technomatix). With Fujicam you will receive all the Benefits of Unicam(ease of manipulation, input of Data) on the Fuji MAchine Platform and Just think. You could even( If you had to) add Panasert or Universal to your Line without changing Programming Platforms......

reply »

John Ryder

#15775

Re: QP2 vs GSM | 29 May, 1998

Jerry, Have you also considered the Philips ACM? It is one of the most accurate and flexible placers in the world. Check it out on our web site www.philips-ia.com =JR=

reply »

Dave McDermid

#15774

Re: QP2 vs GSM | 9 June, 1998

| We are currently comparing the Fuji QP2 machine to the Universal GSM. The primary use will be for QFP's down to .4 mm pitch and for 300+I/O BGAs. My initial input has been that you spend alot of time tweeking PD's on the QP because the vision system is so fussy. I guess we have all been there and done that on IP machines. We are also quite afraid of the new FUJICAM software based on our past experience with MCS and F4G. It seems like Fuji never gets the bugs out of their software they just move to a brand new version...are they owned by Bill Gates? | What have you guys experienced? Any other nonobvious things to look for? By the way these are the only two machines we are or will consider so no sales job required on other machines. I really can't see how Fuji can go wrong with Fujicam. The only flaw I can see is that they are moving to the pc environment..ie=CRASH!. From what I know about Unicam it is a great CAM/CIM tool. Fujicam I would think would leverage a large percent of this ability. As far as PD's... well they are tough sometimes... but if your job was easy?

reply »

Robert Reilly

#15773

Re: QP2 vs GSM | 10 June, 1998

Jerry, I have been using the GSM for about 4.5 years. In my opinion this machine offers the most flexibility and upgradeability of any machine. The ease of use of the software is far superior to any other I have used . Hopefully you are using the latest version of USOS which allows you to graphically change part characteristics using the mouse. There isn't a part I have run into that I could not teach quickly and easily on the GSM. Regards, Rob

reply »

FAC

#15772

Re: QP2 vs GSM | 10 June, 1998

Fuji formed a partnership with UniCam Software to better meet our customers expanding software needs. The resulting product, FujiCam, is based on UniCam's field proven programming tool (4 years on market) and provides greater management of the entire manufacturing process. For more details on the capabilities of the FujiCam system, please contact Fuji America's software department at 847-821-2401.

reply »

FAC

#15771

Re: QP2 vs GSM | 10 June, 1998

When creating part data�s for BGA or QFP style components, the line scan camera will be utilized (Camera No. 4). Using a Single nozzle type placing head, a nozzle capable of sufficient vacuum, and front lighting the part can achieve placement of a 74 mm by 74 mm component. Recently with firmware version 1.72 and vision firmware 2.82, a new function has been added. The Adjustable Frame function will allow a component with dimensions of 148mm by 37mm (i.e. connectors) to be vision processed & placed. Min. lead pitch is 0.28 mm Min. lead width is 0.14 mm Camera resolution is 45 microns I have not seen any problems with the QP242 machine when placing SQFP120 components. The following information was taken from my part data file for a similar part in question: Vision Type: 123 Height: 1.55 Body Size X: 14.00 Body Size Y: 14.00 Check Window Area (Lead Check Area): 30% Pitch Limit: 30% Check Limit: 100% Tolerance Pickup X: 1.00 Tolerance Pickup Y: 1.00 Tolerance Q: 1 degree Auto Offset: Yes Use P Pattern # 14 Result: 1 Set all tolerances to 0. This will set all tolerances in the element to 30%. Width: 0.150 Length: 1.000 Pitch: 0.400 Lighting: 1 (FrontlightA) I have not seen any problems with the QP242 machine when placing BGA components. The following information was taken from my part data file for a similar part in question: Vision Type: 230 (Black Body) Height: 2.10 Body Size X: 27.00 Body Size Y: 27.00 Check Window Area (Lead Check Area): 50% Pitch Limit: 30% Check Limit: 100% Tolerance Pickup X: 1.00 Tolerance Pickup Y: 1.00 Tolerance Q: 1 degree Auto Offset: Yes Use P Pattern # 2 Result: 1 and 128 for the matrix Set all tolerances to 0. This will set all tolerances in the element to 30%. Width: 0.600 (Use approx. 75% of the actual ball diameter to obtain Width) Length: 0.0 Pitch: 1.500 Lighting: 2 (FrontlightB) If you have any further questions on part data's and the QP242 machine, please give us a call. Technical Support and Applications (847) 913-0162

reply »

jcc

#15770

Re: QP2 vs GSM | 26 June, 1998

| We are currently comparing the Fuji QP2 machine to the Universal GSM. The primary use will be for QFP's down to .4 mm pitch and for 300+I/O BGAs. My initial input has been that you spend alot of time tweeking PD's on the QP because the vision system is so fussy. I guess we have all been there and done that on IP machines. We are also quite afraid of the new FUJICAM software based on our past experience with MCS and F4G. It seems like Fuji never gets the bugs out of their software they just move to a brand new version...are they owned by Bill Gates? | What have you guys experienced? Any other nonobvious things to look for? By the way these are the only two machines we are or will consider so no sales job required on other machines. I have been working with Fuji machines for years. With the implementation of the SMD3 vision system, there is no part I come across the IP3 would not place. I have worked with the GSM also, it is a fine machine for some things but it is not built nearly as rugged as Fuji and the vision system is not as good.

reply »

SMT Custom Nozzles